Definitive Qualcomm (A1660/A1661) v. Intel (A1778/A1784) iPhone 7/7 Plus Thread

[airjay75]

I just ordered the QC sim-free version after doing a lot of reading about which version is better, even though my gut told me to get the Intel version to be honest. However, after reading the above post I just realized the phones that have been having all the reception issues are the QC versions whereas nobody seems to be really complaining about the Intel versions. Sure, the QC version is the "better" chip, but that's the version Apple had to push an update for to specifically fix it's issues, which Apple doesn't really tend to do.

I think you'll be fine with either version, and the benefit of the QC version is that it allows you more flexibility with switching carriers, so I wouldn't stress too much about which version you have. I have the Intel version because I financed with AT&T Next (on account of the $650 trade-in promotion they were having). If I were going to pay full price, I'd go sim-free QC version like you. But, I'm not losing any sleep over the perceived differences between these 2 versions. My phone works great, and I'm very happy. If I never read these boards or paid attention to tech news, I'd probably be even happier .

 

[touchstoned]

The intel phone works, it probably works fine for most people. I just got screwed by the topography of my city, which limits reception in every other location I go. I need the best possible 4G reception and Apple advertised this phone as better than the 6s in that regard. The A17xx versions are not functioning as advertised. Whether people are able to get by with what amounts to no difference if you're close to a tower is up to them.

 

[Primejimbo]

Ok, how do I know what I have?

 

[thadoggfather]

I need the best possible 4G reception and Apple advertised this phone as better than the 6s in that regard. The A17xx versions are not functioning as advertised.

Did they though? Did they explicitly say that the radios would be better as a feature, and the answer is I dunno thats why I'm asking, but seems dubious?

I recall 6s+ having worse acoustics than 6+, and I expected them to at least be the same.
Same with the screen, which dipped in quality, but may have just been my panel lottery but also accumulating dust in top left or whatever it was that we still debate in that 6s+ dust in screen thread,

The battery life was also about the same on 6s+, maybe slightly worse honestly, but

Bottom line- expect the unfavorably unexpected, with Apple.

That should be their subtitle to 'Think Different'

 

[ilifecomputer]

The intel phone works, it probably works fine for most people. I just got screwed by the topography of my city, which limits reception in every other location I go. I need the best possible 4G reception and Apple advertised this phone as better than the 6s in that regard. The A17xx versions are not functioning as advertised. Whether people are able to get by with what amounts to no difference if you're close to a tower is up to them.

I know the graph and link and pch and iPhone 5c in bold but let us know if 10.1 made anything better at all

 

[airjay75]

I don't think I've ever heard Apple promise better reception with a new iPhone. Access to more bands, capable of faster speeds, etc., but I don't think I've ever heard them say this iPhone will get you better reception from your local cell tower. To me, that is really more a function of your carrier than the device you're using.

 

[kevinkyoo]

Ok, how do I know what I have?

Really? It's been posted before in this thread. Just look
[doublepost=1477357219][/doublepost]

I don't think I've ever heard Apple promise better reception with a new iPhone. Access to more bands, capable of faster speeds, etc., but I don't think I've ever heard them say this iPhone will get you better reception from your local cell tower. To me, that is really more a function of your carrier than the device you're using.

It's already been proven that carriers have no impact. Bottom line, QC is better than Intel. Why people still spread misrumors surprises me

 

[airjay75]

It's already been proven that carriers have no impact. Bottom line, QC is better than Intel. Why people still spread misrumors surprises me

Carriers have no impact on how strong your cellular signal is? Really? That's a new one to me. I guess next time I'm in an area with "no service" it must be because of my inferior device and not because my carrier simply doesn't have a cell tower close enough for me to actually receive service.

 

[Primejimbo]

Really? It's been posted before in this thread. Just look
[doublepost=1477357219][/doublepost]

It's already been proven that carriers have no impact. Bottom line, QC is better than Intel. Why people still spread misrumors surprises me

Thanks, now I get to read though 16 pages....

 

[kevinkyoo]

Carriers have no impact on how strong your cellular signal is? Really? That's a new one to me. I guess next time I'm in an area with "no service" it must be because of my inferior device and not because my carrier simply doesn't have a cell tower close enough for me to actually receive service.

Did you bother reading the article?

I had a T-Mobile variant of the iPhone 7 plus. My friend had the sim-free version, with a T mobile sim card. In our workplace where the signal was very weak with 3-4G and 1-2 bars, I got nothing, and he got 4G and 3 bars.

If you bothered even trying to understand what was going on, you would've saved your comments and avoided acting like a wiseass
[doublepost=1477359135][/doublepost]

Thanks, now I get to read though 16 pages....

ATT + T mobile = Intel
Version + Sprint + sim-free = QC
Anything in EU = Intel

 

[airjay75]

Did you bother reading the article?

I had a T-Mobile variant of the iPhone 7 plus. My friend had the sim-free version, with a T mobile sim card. In our workplace where the signal was very weak with 3-4G and 1-2 bars, I got nothing, and he got 4G and 3 bars.

If you bothered even trying to understand what was going on, you would've saved your comments and avoided acting like a wiseass

Well, if you bothered to read what I actually said in my prior post, you might realize that I was making a different point. That point, is that Apple has never promised that any iPhone model would get better reception than prior models of the iPhone. That is, you cell phone signal is not going to magically get stronger moving form the iPhone 6 or 6s to the 7.

Now, if you want to talk about the cellular insights test that was done, yes, I've read the article and I fully understand what they tested. You don't seem to understand what they tested. They tested a QC and an Intel model under the same cell phone conditions, that is, the same cell phone signal strength using the same cell phone band. That means, unlike the situation you're describing at your workplace, each phone would have displayed the same number of dots/bars. And, under those conditions, the Intel version had download speeds that were up to 30% less than the QC version. Cellular Insights made no such claim like what you're making - that the Intel version would detect a weaker signal strength than the QC version. The situation you're describing at your workplace could very easily be attributable to the fact that each iPhone was connecting to a different cell tower or to different bands on the same cell tower. Maybe the Intel modem has additional weaknesses beyond what cellular insights tested, but the example you have provided is nothing more than anecdotal, and, therefore, basically worthless to anyone trying to make an informed decision.
[doublepost=1477360088][/doublepost]

Ok, how do I know what I have?

Go to Settings, General, About, Legal, Regulatory, and your model number will display near the top. A1660 and A1661 are the QC models. A1778 and A1784 are the Intel Models.

 

[touchstoned]

I know the graph and link and pch and iPhone 5c in bold but let us know if 10.1 made anything better at all

I'm testing out 10.1 today but if it doesn't fix the issue I have an appointment saturday with customer retention at AT&T. Just ran the update so can't for sure say it did or didn't fix it. Will reply back to thread later today.

 

[thadoggfather]

I wonder if Apple will issue a statement to not worry like they did with Samsung and tsmc a9 variances last year?

 

[Gueeds]

I had the Intel modem on T-mobile.

Maybe mine was a dud, but side by side with my 6+, I'd get noticeable slower speeds while actually using it and in speed tests. This was with the same SIM card. I'd even have absolutely horrible reception outdoors which was never an issue on my previous phone.

Took it back and keeping my 6+

 

[ilifecomputer]

I'm testing out 10.1 today but if it doesn't fix the issue I have an appointment saturday with customer retention at AT&T. Just ran the update so can't for sure say it did or didn't fix it. Will reply back to thread later today.

Thanks, dude.

 

[garethjs]

Carriers have no impact on how strong your cellular signal is? Really? That's a new one to me. I guess next time I'm in an area with "no service" it must be because of my inferior device and not because my carrier simply doesn't have a cell tower close enough for me to actually receive service.

not disagreeing with u but it seems we have a situation of where we have 2 chips in 2 phones at the same area at the same time and one doing significantly better than the other. How does it become the responsibility of the provider to improve that?

 

[airjay75]

not disagreeing with u but it seems we have a situation of where we have 2 chips in 2 phones at the same area at the same time and one doing significantly better than the other. How does it become the responsibility of the provider to improve that?

The only point I was making is that your cell signal is not going to become any stronger simply because you get a new phone. Some people seem to think that, where their iPhone 6s got 1-2 bars/dots of service, their iPhone 7 is supposed to get 3-4 bars/dots of service. The phone isn't going to change how strong your cell signal is. The people claiming that they have 2 iPhone 7's side by side, a QC and an Intel version, and the Intel version is showing less bars/dots than the QC version, and the pointing to this cellular insights laboratory test are conflating two things - cell signal strength and varying download speeds between 2 different modems with the same signal strength.

The only mildly scientific comparison of the QC and Intel iPhone 7 we have is the cellular insight one. I haven't seen any others. And, the conclusion of that comparison was, on iOS 10.0.3 (no longer the current iOS), in a lab environment (i.e., not the real world), given same cell signal strength (i.e., same number of dots/bars), using the same LTE frequency band, there were situations where the download speeds using the Intel modem were up to 30% less than the QC modem. People are taking this basic conclusion, combining it with anecdotal observations about their iPhone, and reaching new conclusions that were not made by the cellular insights comparison. For example, people are anecdotally observing an Intel iPhone 7 not having the same number of dots/bars as a QC iPhone 7 and jumping to the conclusion that the Intel modem is not able to hold onto as strong a cell signal as the QC modem - even if this were true, you would have to test it to make sure other things are not happening like each iPhone connecting to a different cell tower or to a different frequency band, things that can vary with any phone at different times. It could be true that the Intel modem is inferior to the QC modem in ways other than has been tested, but an anecdotal observation does not make it true.

 

[touchstoned]

So I walked in to the AT&T store, and they did offer to take the return but they had no solution for what to do with my iPhone 6s that I had exchanged for the 7. They said that there was a possibility that customer retention could deal with the issue (and somehow procure a A16xx device) because my account has multiple people with this same phone and same problem. My account is a family account with 6 lines and I think given that 3 of those lines are very much compromised by this issue they will do something... not sure what. I suggested they replace the 7 with a refurbished 6S plus or equivalent but they didn't have the option to do that in store.

I will post again when I can talk to customer retention, but so far no success. At this point I am literally just trying to get my money back so I can go to the apple store (or verizon, if AT&T proves unhelpful) and buy a working A16xx 7 from them in cash.
[doublepost=1477435534][/doublepost]

The only point I was making is that your cell signal is not going to become any stronger simply because you get a new phone. Some people seem to think that, where their iPhone 6s got 1-2 bars/dots of service, their iPhone 7 is supposed to get 3-4 bars/dots of service. The phone isn't going to change how strong your cell signal is. The people claiming that they have 2 iPhone 7's side by side, a QC and an Intel version, and the Intel version is showing less bars/dots than the QC version, and the pointing to this cellular insights laboratory test are conflating two things - cell signal strength and varying download speeds between 2 different modems with the same signal strength.

The only mildly scientific comparison of the QC and Intel iPhone 7 we have is the cellular insight one. I haven't seen any others. And, the conclusion of that comparison was, on iOS 10.0.3 (no longer the current iOS), in a lab environment (i.e., not the real world), given same cell signal strength (i.e., same number of dots/bars), using the same LTE frequency band, there were situations where the download speeds using the Intel modem were up to 30% less than the QC modem. People are taking this basic conclusion, combining it with anecdotal observations about their iPhone, and reaching new conclusions that were not made by the cellular insights comparison. For example, people are anecdotally observing an Intel iPhone 7 not having the same number of dots/bars as a QC iPhone 7 and jumping to the conclusion that the Intel modem is not able to hold onto as strong a cell signal as the QC modem - even if this were true, you would have to test it to make sure other things are not happening like each iPhone connecting to a different cell tower or to a different frequency band, things that can vary with any phone at different times. It could be true that the Intel modem is inferior to the QC modem in ways other than has been tested, but an anecdotal observation does not make it true.

Less signal strengths results in a drop in throughput, they are the exact same issue. The phone increases bandwidth when it can maintain signal strength long enough to send packets and get the corresponding acknowledgments, it is you who is not comprehending that fact and thus drawing distinctions where there are none.
[doublepost=1477435910][/doublepost]

Thanks, dude.

Call quality seems to have improved with 10.1, I was able to complete a call around PCH today where I don't think I would've before. As far as fixing the reception, it's still worse than my 6S but it appears to have improved.

 

[airjay75]

Less signal strengths results in a drop in throughput, they are the exact same issue. The phone increases bandwidth when it can maintain signal strength long enough to send packets and get the corresponding acknowledgments, it is you who is not comprehending that fact and thus drawing distinctions where there are none.

The Cellular Insights comparison (http://cellularinsights.com/iphone7/) tested throughput on each phone by varying signal strength and varying the band frequency used. The dots/bars that are displayed on your iPhone are a reflection of signal strength, not throughput. If someone wants to use this comparison to explain why their Intel iPhone 7 is displaying fewer dots/bars than they think it should be showing, go for it. I don't really care. That is not a conclusion Cellular Insights drew from their testing nor is it one that can be logically inferred from what they wrote.

 

[touchstoned]

Thanks, dude.

The Cellular Insights comparison (http://cellularinsights.com/iphone7/) tested throughput on each phone by varying signal strength and varying the band frequency used. The dots/bars that are displayed on your iPhone are a reflection of signal strength, not throughput. If someone wants to use this comparison to explain why their Intel iPhone 7 is displaying fewer dots/bars than they think it should be showing, go for it. I don't really care. That is not a conclusion Cellular Insights drew from their testing nor is it one that can be logically inferred from what they wrote.

Actually it very much can be logically inferred that the modem increases bandwidth when it has better signal and decreases it when it has less signal. By testing the signal strength (i.e. the bars on your iPhone screen) you are testing throughput, and vice versa.

Since you seem not to understand what I'm talking about, I will explain. Modems work on what are called protocols, they are systems by which the modem can communicate with other modems (cell towers). Wireless modems also operate on protocols, which are more or less analogous to the ones used by wired modems (layer 3 switches). Modems work by sending what are called "packets" in "frames". Almost all modems can operate multiple protocols, but most protocols include "acknowledgment" of receipt of packets and frames. So the modem in your iPhone generates a packet, and sends it to another modem (the tower). The tower then sends back an acknowledgment of the receipt of the packet. This is done thousands of times per second, if there is bandwidth, and as it is done the modem analyses the % of sent packets that receive acknowledgments. As that % increases, the modem thinks (based on the protocol) "most of my packets are being received without issue, I should increase the number of packets sent or possibly open more ports". This is also what your signal bar is telling you: What % of my sent packets are being received? What % am I receiving from other modems?

Conversely, as signal is reduced, the % of packets received will drop... and the modem will think (based on the protocol) "I should reduce the number of packets sent, but increase the antenna power to try to get those packets received". Thus signal goes down.


That's why signal strength and throughput are different sides of the same coin, throughput is just the amount of packets that are being sent. Signal strength as displayed on your iPhone is completely dependent on what bandwidth you are getting in whatever protocol the modem is using at the time. All of this is completely opaque to the user, so it's understandable that you got confused.
[doublepost=1477441708][/doublepost]

Thanks, now I get to read though 16 pages....

If your device has A1784 or A1778 printed on the back it is intel. If it's anything else, you've lucked out.


Verizon, Sprint, and Unlocked Apple are all A16xx (Qualcomm MDM9645M)
AT&T and Tmobile are A17xx (Intel XMM7360)

 

[airjay75]

Actually it very much can be logically inferred that the modem increases bandwidth when it has better signal and decreases it when it has less signal. By testing the signal strength (i.e. the bars on your iPhone screen) you are testing throughput, and vice versa.

Since you seem not to understand what I'm talking about, I will explain. Modems work on what are called protocols, they are systems by which the modem can communicate with other modems (cell towers). Wireless modems also operate on protocols, which are more or less analogous to the ones used by wired modems (layer 3 switches). Modems work by sending what are called "packets" in "frames". Almost all modems can operate multiple protocols, but most protocols include "acknowledgment" of receipt of packets and frames. So the modem in your iPhone generates a packet, and sends it to another modem (the tower). The tower then sends back an acknowledgment of the receipt of the packet. This is done thousands of times per second, if there is bandwidth, and as it is done the modem analyses the % of sent packets that receive acknowledgments. As that % increases, the modem thinks (based on the protocol) "most of my packets are being received without issue, I should increase the number of packets sent or possibly open more ports". This is also what your signal bar is telling you: What % of my sent packets are being received? What % am I receiving from other modems?

Conversely, as signal is reduced, the % of packets received will drop... and the modem will think (based on the protocol) "I should reduce the number of packets sent, but increase the antenna power to try to get those packets received". Thus signal goes down.

That's why signal strength and throughput are different sides of the same coin, throughput is just the amount of packets that are being sent. Signal strength as displayed on your iPhone is completely dependent on what bandwidth you are getting in whatever protocol the modem is using at the time. All of this is completely opaque to the user, so it's understandable that you got confused.

So, can you explain to me why Cellular Insights even needed to test the download speeds in their study? If the bars/dots (or if we want to get more specific, the dBm number displayed in field test mode) necessarily corresponds to a certain download speed, why even go to the bother of actually testing it? I ask because I want to understand not because I'm trying to prove a point. What you are saying does not follow from the what I read in the Cellular Insights article, but I will readily admit that I'm not any sort of an expert. What I read in the Cellular Insights article was that, keeping signal strength constant, each modem was achieving different download speeds.

 

[Rcracerg911]

Anyone notice increased performance after installing 10.2 beta 1 with updated intel firmware, or att carrier profile ?

 

[jmelrose]

Anyone notice increased performance after installing 10.2 beta 1 with updated intel firmware, or att carrier profile ?

Just wondering, are you asking because YOU have noticed it, or just out of curiosity/hope?

 

[Rcracerg911]

Just wondering, are you asking because YOU have noticed it, or just out of curiosity/hope?

Mostly curiosity, but some hope; I do have the update installed but not sure if it's made any difference

 

[ffacing339]

So ive been reading through these posts. I have a 1778 from Tmobile, and have nothing but connectivity issues, has been replaced by tmobile several times to no fix, same issue at hand. All updated and restored to rule out any software issues. So I went out a purchased a 1660 from Apple Store to do my own real world testing side by side, same network, time, location etc around the town I live in. So far the Qualcomm is producing better results.

I'm currently chatting with apple engineers on this matter, but they don't have anything yet.

Has anyone else had similar issues with the intel version, showing LTE service, but not wanting to connect or transmit any data??